Writing assessment readers: honrs 150 instructors



Download 3.38 Mb.
Date29.11.2018
Size3.38 Mb.
#73122

Writing Assessment

  • WRITING &
  • CRITICAL THINKING
  • ASSESSMENT

WRITING ASSESSMENT

READERS: HONRS 150 INSTRUCTORS

  • Number of papers read: 41
  • Number of readers per paper: 2
  • Number of readers: 8
  • (Gary Hatch, Joyce Adams, Elizabeth Crowe, Lisa Johnson, Deirdre Paulsen, Kerry Spencer, Kylie Turley)
  • WRITING RUBRIC
  • Paper #:
  • Title:
  • Course:
  • Traits
  • Meets Standard
  • Exceeds Standard
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • Thesis and Support
  • Has a clear, recognizable assertion that provides focus and direction to the essay.
  • Shows recognition of opposing views, multiple perspectives, or location within scholarly literature
  • Organization
  • Lacks clear, transparent organization. Characterized by lack of flow and coherence
  • Clear, transparent organization. Characterized by coherence and flow within sections. Transitions may be formulaic or mechanical.
  • Organized conceptually rather than formulaically. Consistent coherence and flow. Transitions move beyond the formulaic or mechanical.
  • Rhetorical Knowledge
  • Suggests a lack of awareness of rhetorical situation
  • Demonstrates an awareness of subject, audience, occasion, and purpose. Stylistic choices are appropriate for rhetorical situation.
  • Consistent voice (style, tone, and point of view appropriate to subject, audience, occasion, and purpose).
  • Use of Sources
  • Inappropriate sources that may be poorly integrated. May not consistently give appropriate credit.
  • Uses appropriate scholarly sources that are well integrated in the essay. Sources are properly introduced. Gives appropriate credit for sources.
  • Engages the sources. Demonstrates exceptional depth of research, such as primary research data, primary documents, or visual sources.
  • Knowledge of Conventions
  • Inconsistent in following standards of EAE and citation style.
  • Generally follows accepted standards of edited American English and details of appropriate citation style.
  • Consistent in following standards of edited American English and details of appropriate citation style.
  • Notes (only for elements of an essay that aren’t covered by the rubric):

Overall Scores by Standard

  • 6 papers
  • 19 papers
  • 16 papers
  • N = 41

Trait – Knowledge of Conventions

  • 5 papers
  • 22 papers
  • 14 papers
  • N = 41

Trait - Organization

  • 5 papers
  • 16 papers
  • 20 papers
  • N = 41

Trait – Rhetorical Knowledge

  • 8 papers
  • 16 papers
  • 17 papers
  • N = 41

Trait - Thesis

  • 9 papers
  • 21 papers
  • 11 papers
  • N = 41

Trait – Correct Use of Sources

  • 7 papers
  • 18 papers
  • 16 papers
  • N = 41

All Traits

  • N = 41

Reader Agreement

  • Agree
  • 1 Split
  • 2 Split
  • Conventions
  • 41.46%
  • 51.22%
  • 7.32%
  • Organization
  • 46.34%
  • 51.22%
  • 2.44%
  • Rhetorical Knowledge
  • 39.02%
  • 53.66%
  • 7.32%
  • Thesis
  • 46.34%
  • 48.78%
  • 4.88%
  • Sources
  • 43.90%
  • 75.61%
  • 4.88%
  • OVERALL
  • 43.41%
  • 56.10%
  • 5.37%

Reader Agreement

Critical Thinking Assessment

Critical Thinking Readers

  • Bill Baker, Management Communications
  • Ralph Brown, Sociology
  • Valerie Hegstrom, Spanish & Portuguese
  • John Lamb, General Education & Chemistry
  • Hal Miller, Psychology
  • Karen Pierotti, General Education
  • Robert Seegmiller, Physiology & Developmental Biology
  • CRITICAL THINKING RUBRIC
  • Trait
  • Fails Standard
  • Meets Standard
  • Exceeds Standard
  • NA
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • Main idea/claim/ argument/hypothesis
  • ● lacks clarity & focus
  • ● fails to clarify
  • ● articulates clearly at early point & once thereafter
  • ● sustains the argument
  • ● maintains focus on theme
  • ● offers insightful, sophisticated point of view
  • Evidence
  • ● lacks sufficient evidence
  • ● citations improperly applied/ inappropriate
  • ● makes effective use of strong, well-placed, extensive, and relevant resources
  • Logic
  • ● uses weak, narrow, shallow argumentation
  • ● does not make connections
  • ● does not recognize assumptions, inferences
  • ● uses faulty logic
  • ●demonstrates reasonable
  • development, discernible connections, coherent thinking
  • ● recognizes assumptions/ inferences
  • ● brings argument to a logical conclusion
  • ● achieves strongly reasoned development
  • ● provides analysis of assumptions or inferences
  • ● makes strong connections
  • ● provides compelling commentary or synthesis
  • Alternative Points of
  • View
  • ● presents biased, unbalance, or narrow thinking
  • ● reflects poor awareness of critical context
  • ● presents counterarguments/ alternatives
  • ● recognizes weakness(es) of own viewpoint
  • ● shows sensitivity to other perspective
  • ● locates argument within current critical discourse (context)
  • ● reflects mature balance in point of view
  • Trait - Ideas
  • Main idea/claim/argument/hypothesis
  • 1 paper
  • 2 papers
  • 8 papers
  • N = 11

Trait - Evidence

  • 1 paper
  • 7 papers
  • 3 papers
  • N = 11

Trait – Logic/Assumptions

  • 1 paper
  • 3 papers
  • 7 papers
  • N = 11
  • Trait – Alternative Points of View
  • 1 paper
  • 3 papers
  • 7 papers
  • N = 11

All Traits

All Traits: Writing & Critical Thinking

  • Writing
  • Critical Thinking
  • N = 41
  • N = 11
  • Critical Thinking & Writing Assessment
  • In the future

Assessment via Final Exams

  • Collecting final exam information during FGEC Reviews
  • A copy of a final exam
  • Student performance on final exam
  • Purpose
  • Verify that the exams line up with the foundation documents and learning outcomes.

Assessment via Advanced Writing

  • During Fall and Winter semesters, the GE office will collect about 150 papers from different departments who teach advanced writing.
  • Paper Criteria
  • 1. Single-author papers and some collaborative papers (when using collaborative papers we would need to know how the collaboration was set up for the collaborative groups.)
  • 2. A paper using library resources that has real research associated with it
  • 3. The paper should be about 8-15 pages long, double-spaced.
  • 4. There should be no mark up on the papers by instructors
  • 5. Preferably the paper should be in electronic format (Word program is preferred.)

Assessment via Advanced Writing

  • Course Choice
  • GE office will collect papers from various departments
    • 75% of the papers will come from different sections of courses in the English, Philosophy and Management Communication departments;
    • the other 25% will come from other departments that teach only one or two sections of a course, e.g. Chem 391.
  • Choosing Papers
  • GE Office will request a chosen course’s class roll to randomly pick 5 juniors or seniors in the course
  • GE will provide release/permissions sheets to the chosen students so we have permission to use their papers for the study.

Assessment via Advanced Writing

  • Submitting the Papers
  • Electronically to Karen Pierotti, Administrative Assistant, General Education
  • Distribution of Papers to Assessment Committee
  • Student’s name, instructor’s name, and course will be eliminated from the paper
  • Paper will receive a number before it is given to the committee
  • Assessment
  • During spring term, two committees will assess the papers for writing and critical thinking

GE Web Site

  • Statistical Results
  • Annotated copies of papers for both writing & critical thinking

Writing Assessment

  • WRITING &
  • CRITICAL THINKING
  • ASSESSMENT


Download 3.38 Mb.

Share with your friends:




The database is protected by copyright ©www.sckool.org 2022
send message

    Main page